How the NYPD defeated bodycams (pluralistic.net)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Police boosters insist that police violence and corruption are the result of "a few bad apples." As the saying goes, "a few bad apples spoil the bushel." If you think there are just a few bad cops on the force, then you should want to get rid of them before they wreck the whole institution. Bodycams could empirically identify the bad apples, right?

Well, hypothetically. But what if police leadership don't want to get rid of the bad apples? What if the reason that dashcams, tasers, and pepper spray failed is that police leadership are fine with them? If that were the case, then bodycams would turn into just another expensive prop for an off-Broadway accountability theater.

top 10 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] [email protected] 32 points 8 months ago

It wouldn't be too hard to create a system that records everything the cop does... and transmit it to a storage facility in which that specific cop has no ability to delete would be simple. Incredibly simple.

the idea that a cop gets to choose what the body camera records and that it was a failure of the camera is an intentional narrative to protect bad cops. normal americans live under constant scrutiny (not just by cops, but by everyone.)... they should have more, not less.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

Oops forgot to wear it

[-] [email protected] 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

First offense, 72 hour unpaid leave. And better hope there’s no complaints because not wearing it is reasonable suspicion.

Second offense? Goodbye.

(And this is why I’m all for spending hikes for cops. Improved recruiting means better ability to fire shitty cops. Oh, that and better training in how to not kill people, and stuff.) (it’s really too bad that cops go and spend all that funding in armored tanks, and stuff…)

[-] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

First offense, 72 hour unpaid leave. And better hope there’s no complaints because not wearing it is reasonable suspicion.

Second offense? Goodbye.

That's the key. You can do a lot with technology, but many problems are not solvable with technology alone.

It does not matter how safe or reliable bodycams work if there are no repercussions for not wearing or disabling them. But since american cops are not even held accountable if they straight up murder people, nobody should be surprised that bodycams "don't work" in a system like this.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

Will not be long till we all have cams on us while we work.

[-] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

most retail already do. and... there's no need for office types when they can literally see what you're doing on the screen.

Office buildings, usually have something, too, above the cubicles.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago

I can see them eventually wanting personal cams with audio. Will happen.

[-] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago

"we shouldn't let a few good apples exonerate the whole bushel"

[-] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Even if they are perfectly fine, we shouldn't bother trying to sift the corn and peanuts out of the shit.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

I said this in a similar thread this morning- body cams don't matter if the system works always in your favor.

this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2023

96 points (96.2% liked)

politics

18788 readers

2759 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News